Spotlight on Ranolazine in Chronic Stable Angina Pectoris

Ranolazine (Ranexa), a piperazine derivative, is a new antianginal agent approved for the treatment of chronic stable angina pectoris for use as combination therapy when angina is not adequately controlled with other antianginal agents. While the exact mechanism of action of ranolazine is not known, its antianginal and anti-ischemic effects do not appear to depend upon changes in BP or heart rate. An extended-release (ER) oral formulation of ranolazine has been developed to facilitate twice-daily administration whilst maintaining therapeutically effective plasma concentrations. In patients with chronic stable angina, ranolazine ER monotherapy was shown to improve exercise duration at trough plasma drug concentration in a dose-dependent manner compared with placebo. The drug was effective as adjunctive therapy in patients with chronic stable angina whose condition was not controlled adequately with conventional antianginal therapy. In randomized clinical trials, ranolazine ER was well tolerated, with no overt effects on cardiovascular hemodynamics or conduction, apart from a modest increase in corrected QT interval (but no torsades de pointes). Importantly, the efficacy and tolerability of ranolazine ER were not affected by old age and co-morbid conditions (heart failure or diabetes mellitus). Comparative trials of ranolazine ER with other antianginal agents and trials examining its effects on long-term morbidity and mortality in patients with ischemic heart disease are required to determine with greater certainty the place of the drug in current antianginal therapy. Nevertheless, ranolazine ER may well prove to be a useful alternative and adjunct to conventional hemodynamic antianginal therapy in the treatment of chronic stable angina.     

Vildagliptin

Vildagliptin is a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor that is being evaluated in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. It improves glycaemic control by inhibiting DPP-4 from inactivating the incretin hormones glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, prolonging incretin activity in response to ingestion of nutrients. This allows for increased insulin sensitivity, decreased glucagon secretion and improved beta-cell function in a glucose-dependent manner. Glycaemic control with vildagliptin 50 or 100 mg/day, measured by a change from baseline in mean glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) at study endpoint, was improved relative to placebo in several well designed clinical trials of vildagliptin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes. In randomised active comparator studies, noninferiority of vildagliptin in reducing HbA(1c) levels from baseline was established to rosiglitazone, but not to metformin. Vildagliptin also showed efficacy in reducing HbA(1c) levels in patients with type 2 diabetes when used in combination with metformin, pioglitazone or insulin. Vildagliptin was generally well tolerated when administered alone or in combination with additional antidiabetic treatment. Gastrointestinal adverse events were mild to moderate in intensity, and occurred less frequently than with metformin. Hypoglycaemic events were rare and occurred at a similar incidence to that with placebo.     

Bicalutamide 150mg: a review of its use in the treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer

Bicalutamide (Casodex) is a competitive androgen receptor antagonist that inactivates androgen-regulated prostate cell growth and function, leading to cell apoptosis and inhibition of prostate cancer growth. It is administered orally as a once-daily dose. In the EU and a number of other countries, bicalutamide 150 mg/day is approved in men with locally advanced nonmetastatic prostate cancer as immediate therapy either as an adjuvant to active treatment or as monotherapy as an alternative to surgical or medical castration.Combined analysis of the three trials that comprise the bicalutamide Early Prostate Cancer (EPC) programme showed that bicalutamide administered in conjunction with standard care in men with locally advanced prostate cancer offers disease-free survival benefits over standard care alone and is generally well tolerated. Overall survival was improved to a greater extent in the subgroup of patients who received bicalutamide plus radiation therapy compared with radiation therapy alone. Men with localised prostate cancer do not benefit from the addition of bicalutamide to standard care. Combined analysis of two other studies in men with locally advanced prostate cancer show that bicalutamide monotherapy offers better tolerability and higher health-related quality-of-life (HR-QOL) scores for sexual interest and physical capacity compared with surgical or medical castration, while achieving disease-free and overall survival durations that were not significantly different. Thus, when treatment options are being evaluated, bicalutamide as adjuvant therapy or monotherapy should be considered as an alternative to other available hormonal therapies in men with locally advanced prostate cancer, especially in those who wish to maintain an active lifestyle.     

Spotlight on the Pharmacoeconomics of Candesartan Cilexetil in Chronic Heart Failure and Hypertension

The addition of candesartan cilexetil (Atacand®, Amias®, Biopress®, Kenzen®, Ratacand®) to standard therapy for chronic heart failure (CHF) provided important clinical benefits at little or no additional cost in France, Germany, and the UK, according to a detailed economic analysis focusing on major cardiovascular events and prospectively collected resource-use data from the CHARM-Added and CHARM-Alternative trials in patients with CHF and left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction. Results of a corresponding cost-effectiveness analysis showed that candesartan cilexetil was either dominant over placebo or was associated with small incremental costs per life-year gained, depending on the country and whether individual trial or pooled data were used. Preliminary data from a US cost-effectiveness analysis based on CHARM data also showed favorable results for candesartan cilexetil.Two cost-effectiveness analyses of candesartan cilexetil in hypertension have been published, both conducted in Sweden. Data from the SCOPE trial in elderly patients with hypertension, which showed a significant reduction in nonfatal stroke with candesartan cilexetil-based therapy versus non-candesartan cilexetil-based treatment, were incorporated into a Markov model and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €12 824 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained was calculated (2001 value). Another modelled cost-effectiveness analysis of candesartan cilexetil was based on the ALPINE trial, in which the incidence of new-onset diabetes was significantly lower in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension who were randomized to candesartan cilexetil (with or without felodipine) than among those who received hydrochlorothiazide (with or without atenolol). Although candesartan cilexetil was dominant over hydrochlorothiazide, the ALPINE cost-effectiveness analysis relied on a small number of clinical events and did not evaluate the incremental cost of candesartan cilexetil per life-year or QALY gained.In conclusion, despite some inherent limitations, economic analyses incorporating CHARM data and conducted primarily in Europe have shown that candesartan cilexetil appears to be cost effective when added to standard CHF treatment in patients with CHF and compromized LV systolic function. The use of candesartan cilexetil as part of antihypertensive therapy in elderly patients with elevated blood pressure was also deemed to be cost effective in a Swedish analysis, primarily resulting from a reduced risk of nonfatal stroke (as shown in the SCOPE study); however, the generalizability of results to other contexts has not been established. Cost-effectiveness analyses comparing candesartan cilexetil with ACE inhibitors or other angiotensin receptor blockers in CHF or hypertension are lacking, and results reported for candesartan cilexetil in a Swedish economic analysis of ALPINE data focusing on outcomes for diabetes require confirmation and extension.     

Development of a Predictive Model for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Using Genetic and Clinical Data

Objectives

Recent genetic association studies have provided convincing evidence that several novel loci and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are associated with the risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aims of this study were: 1) to develop a predictive model of T2DM using genetic and clinical data; and 2) to compare misclassification rates of different models.

Methods

We selected 212 individuals with newly diagnosed T2DM and 472 controls aged in their 60s from the Korean Genome and Epidemiology Study. A total of 499 known SNPs from 87 T2DM-related genes were genotyped using germline DNA. SNPs were analyzed for significant association with T2DM using various classification algorithms including Quest (Quick, Unbiased, Efficient, Statistical tree), Support Vector Machine, C4.5, logistic regression, and K-nearest neighbor.

Results

We tested these models using the complete Korean Genome and Epidemiology Study cohort (n = 10,038) and computed the T2DM misclassification rates for each model. Average misclassification rates ranged at 28.2–52.7%. The misclassification rates for the logistic and machine-learning algorithms were lower than the statistical tree algorithms. Using 1-to-1 matched data, the misclassification rate of the statistical tree QUEST algorithm using body mass index and SNP variables was the lowest, but overall the logistic regression performed best.

Conclusions

The K-nearest neighbor method exhibited more robust results than other algorithms. For clinical and genetic data, our “multistage adjustment” model outperformed other models in yielding lower rates of misclassification. To improve the performance of these models, further studies using warranted, strategies to estimate better classifiers for the quantification of SNPs need to be developed.     

Rupatadine: a review of its use in the management of allergic disorders

Rupatadine (Rupafin, Rinialer, Rupax, Alergoliber) is a selective oral histamine H(1)-receptor antagonist that has also been shown to have platelet-activating factor (PAF) antagonist activity in vitro. It is indicated for use in seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) and chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) in patients aged >/=12 years.Clinical trials show that rupatadine is an effective and generally well tolerated treatment for allergic rhinitis and CIU. It has a rapid onset of action and a prolonged duration of activity. Importantly, it has no significant effect on cognition, psychomotor function or the cardiovascular system. Once-daily rupatadine significantly improves allergic rhinitis symptoms in patients with SAR, PAR or persistent allergic rhinitis (PER) compared with placebo, and provides similar symptom control to that of loratadine, desloratadine, cetirizine or ebastine. In patients with CIU, longer-term use of rupatadine improves CIU symptoms to a greater extent than placebo. It is as well tolerated as other commonly used second-generation H(1)-receptor antagonists. Thus, the introduction of rupatadine extends the range of oral agents available for the treatment of allergic disorders, including allergic rhinitis and CIU.     

Tiotropium Bromide

Tiotropium bromide (Spiriva) is a long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator that maintains bronchodilation for at least 24 hours, allowing once-daily administration. The active moiety is the tiotropium cation (tiotropium); tiotropium bromide 22.5 micrograms is equivalent to 18 micrograms of tiotropium cation. Greater improvements in lung function from baseline (primary endpoint mean trough FEV(1)) were observed with inhaled tiotropium 18 micrograms once daily than with placebo in 6-month and 1-year randomized, double-blind trials in patients with COPD. Tiotropium improved lung function (trough FEV(1) response) more effectively than ipratropium bromide (ipratropium) 40 micrograms four times daily in 1-year clinical trials, and was at least as effective as salmeterol 50 micrograms 12-hourly in 6-month trials. Preliminary data suggest that tiotropium alone or in combination with once-daily formoterol has a greater bronchodilator effect than twice-daily formoterol in patients with COPD. Improvements in patients' perception of health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) or dyspnea were greater with tiotropium than with placebo or ipratropium, and were similar to those with salmeterol. Reductions in the frequency and severity of acute exacerbations and in the use of rescue medication were also greater with tiotropium than with ipratropium or placebo. There was no evidence of tachyphylaxis with tiotropium during 1-year clinical trials. Inhaled tiotropium was generally well tolerated in clinical trials. Apart from dry mouth, the type and incidence of adverse events with tiotropium were similar to those with ipratropium, salmeterol or placebo in patients with COPD. In conclusion, inhaled tiotropium 18 micrograms once daily improved lung function, dyspnea, and HR-QOL, and decreased the incidence of acute COPD exacerbations and the use of rescue medication relative to placebo or ipratropium in clinical trials in patients with COPD. Tiotropium was at least as effective as salmeterol in terms of bronchodilator efficacy and improvements in dyspnea or HR-QOL. With the exception of dry mouth, the tolerability profile of tiotropium was similar to that with placebo, ipratropium, or salmeterol. Consequently, inhaled tiotropium is likely to be a valuable option for first-line, long-term maintenance therapy in the management of bronchoconstriction in patients with symptomatic COPD. Tiotropium bromide has a quaternary ammonium structure and acts as an anticholinergic bronchodilator; the active moiety is the tiotropium cation (tiotropium). A 22.5 micrograms dose of tiotropium bromide provides 18 micrograms of tiotropium. Orally inhaled tiotropium bromide antagonizes the muscarinic M(1), M(2), and M(3) receptors located in airway smooth muscle, reversing vagally mediated bronchoconstriction. Receptor binding assays and in vitro tests indicate that tiotropium bromide is kinetically selective for M(1) and M(3) receptors over the M(2) receptor, unlike ipratropium bromide, which is nonselective. Animal and in vitro studies showed that tiotropium bromide was more potent ( approximate, equals 20-fold) than ipratropium bromide in displacing [(3)H]N-methylscopolamine (NMS) from muscarinic receptors, and had a more sustained protective effect (>70% inhibition) against NMS binding. Tiotropium bromide was a more potent inhibitor of bronchial contraction than atropine ( approximate, equals 23-fold), and had a slower onset and markedly longer duration of action than atropine or an equipotent dose of ipratropium bromide. Aerosol particle penetration is improved with tiotropium, without delaying mucus clearance from the lungs. Tiotropium 4.5-36 micrograms once daily for 4 weeks increased mean trough and average FEV(1) and FVC and mean PEFR values from baseline compared with placebo, with no evidence of tachyphylaxis. Improvements in trough FEV(1) from baseline with tiotropium 4.5-36 micrograms were not dose dependent. Based on a lack of dose response, the optimal once-daily tiotropium dosage is 18 micrograms. Steady-state trough FEV(1) values are achieved within 48 hours of commencing tiotrochodilation (for >/=24 hours) and an attenuation of the nocturnal decline in FEV(1) that were unaffected by timing of the daily tiotropium dose were seen in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in patients with stable COPD. The drug improved static and dynamic lung hyperinflation (evidenced by reduced trapped air volume and increased tidal volume and end-of-exercise inspiratory capacity), and improved exertional dyspnea (during activities of daily living and exertion) and exercise tolerance compared with placebo in randomized, double-blind studies. In patients with stable COPD, improved sleep-related oxygen desaturation that was unaffected by the timing of the daily dose was seen with tiotropium but not with placebo. Clinically significant treatment-related disorders of conduction or rhythm, or changes in heart rate were not observed with tiotropium in this patient group. Mean maximal plasma concentrations (C(max)) were observed within 5 minutes of inhalation of a single dose of tiotropium 18 micrograms in patients with COPD. Plasma drug levels declined to minimum concentrations (C(min)) within 1 hour of treatment in healthy volunteers. Mean steady-state C(max) concentrations (16 ng/L) were achieved after 2-3 weeks of once-daily inhaled tiotropium 18 micrograms in elderly patients with COPD; tiotropium does not appear to accumulate once steady-state has been achieved.The estimated absolute bioavailability of tiotropium at steady state in healthy volunteers was approximately 20-25%, and approximately 72% of the drug is bound to plasma proteins. Excretion of tiotropium is predominantly renal (through active secretion by the kidneys), although in vitro studies suggest that cytochrome P450 (CYP) oxidation (possibly involving CYP2D6 and CYP3A4 enzymes) may have a minor role. In patients with COPD, renal excretion of the unchanged drug at 24 hours (Ae(24)) was approximately 7%. The mean plasma elimination half-life after single or multiple doses in healthy volunteers and elderly patients with COPD was approximately 5-6 days. The renal clearance and urinary excretion of tiotropium decrease with increasing age; however, these changes are not considered to be clinically significant. Because of altered steady-state C(max), C(min), area under the concentration-time curve, and Ae(24) values, caution is required with tiotropium administration in patients with moderate-to-severe renal impairment. The pharmacokinetics of tiotropium in patients with severe renal or hepatic impairment have not been studied. Tiotropium does not interact with drugs such as cimetidine or ranitidine, which are also eliminated by active renal secretion. Orally inhaled tiotropium bromide has been evaluated as a bronchodilator for the management of patients with COPD in randomized, double-blind 6-month and 1-year trials, and in several shorter studies. In clinical trials, COPD was diagnosed according to the American Thoracic Society guidelines. The bronchodilator effect was expressed as the trough FEV(1) response (the mean change in FEV(1) from baseline measured 1 hour prior to and immediately before a scheduled dose), and was the primary endpoint in all but two clinical trials. The bronchodilator effect with tiotropium 18 micrograms once daily was superior to that with placebo in several well designed trials in patients with COPD. Moreover, greater improvements in mean peak and average FEV(1) responses occurred with tiotropium but not with placebo. Mean trough, peak, and average FVC responses, and weekly mean morning and evening PEFR values were also improved to a greater extent with tiotropium than with placebo. Tiotropium demonstrated a greater bronchodilator effect than ipratropium bromide (hereafter referred to as ipratropium when used at approved dosages) 40 micrograms four times daily in two 1-year trials in patients with COPD. Mean peak and average FEV(1), mean trough FVC responses, and weekly mean morning and evening PEFR values were also increased to a greater extent with tiotropium than with ipratropium. In one of the two 6-month trials that compared the efficacy of tiotropium with that of inhaled salmeterol 50 micrograms twice daily, greater improvements from baseline in mean trough, peak, and average FEV(1) and FVC responses were seen with tiotropium than with salmeterol. Increases in weekly mean evening, but not morning, PEFR values were generally greater with tiotropium than salmeterol. In the second trial, improvement in the primary endpoint (mean trough FEV(1) response from baseline) with tiotropium or salmeterol was similar, although peak and average responses were superior with tiotropium. Preliminary results from a 6-week crossover study in patients with COPD suggested that tiotropium alone or in combination with once-daily formoterol improved mean trough and average FEV(1) and trough FVC values from baseline to a greater extent than twice-daily formoterol. More patients achieved a clinically important improvement (increase of >/=1 unit) in the transitional dyspnea index focal score (a measure of dyspnea-related impairment) with tiotropium than with placebo in the 1-year trials. Tiotropium was superior to ipratropium in 1-year trials, and was at least as effective as salmeterol in 6-month trials, in achieving a clinically important improvement in focal scores. Tiotropium recipients experienced fewer COPD exacerbations than placebo or ipratropium recipients and had fewer and shorter COPD-related hospitalizations compared with placebo recipients. Unlike salmeterol, tiotropium lengthened the time to onset of the first exacerbation and decreased the number of exacerbations compared with placebo in two 6-month trials. Similar proportions of tiotropium, salmeterol, and placebo recipients required COPD-related hospitalizations. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)     

Surrogate decision-making in Korean patients with advanced cancer: a longitudinal study

Purpose

Although surrogate decision-making in cancer patients is well-known, few studies investigating the prevalence of surrogate decision-making over time have been reported. The objectives of this study were to investigate the level of surrogate decision-making in advanced cancer patients over time and the impact of demographic and clinical variables on surrogate decision-making.

Methods

The level of surrogate decision-making was measured in 572 consecutive cancer patients who died between January 1 and December 31, 2009. We reviewed 8,639 informed consent forms of these patients, calculated the proportion of decisions made by a surrogate (PDS) for each patient, and analyzed the association of PDS with demographic and clinical variables.

Results

Surrogates completed 40.3?% of all consent forms. The prevalence of surrogate decision-making was higher in the end-of-life period (death <7?days, OR?=?29.05; reference, >365?days). Surrogates signed consent forms more frequently for do-not-resuscitate directives, intensive care unit admission, emergency hemodialysis, surgery and invasive interventions compared with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and diagnostic tests (OR?=?3.88, P?<?0.001). Patients of older age (P?=?0.036) and those with a shorter duration of management (P?<?0.001) were independently associated with greater PDS.

Conclusions

Surrogate decision-making was frequently observed among Korean cancer patients in this study, especially when the patient??s death was imminent, and for decisions related to end-of-life care. Surrogates were also frequently involved in decisions for elderly or rapidly deteriorating patients. Healthcare professionals should consider the significant role of familial surrogates in the end-of-life period; comprehensive approaches are needed to preserve the best interest of the patients.     

The attitudes of Korean cancer patients, family caregivers, oncologists, and members of the general public toward advance directives

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate Korean attitudes toward advance directives (ADs) among cancer patients, family caregivers, oncologists, and the general public.

Methods

A multicenter survey study explored the attitudes of participants to ADs, and hospice–palliative care (HPC) was conducted. A total of 1,242 cancer patients, 1,289 family caregivers, 303 oncologists, and 1,006 members of the general public participated in the survey.

Results

The majority of patients, family caregivers, oncologists, and general public agreed with the necessity of ADs. However, oncologists regard “when became terminal status” as an optimal timing for completion of ADs (52.2 %), while other groups regard earlier periods as it. More than 95 % oncologist answered that cardiopulmonary resuscitation and mechanical ventilator are necessity items for ADs form, while around 70 % of other groups answered so. Multivariate analysis revealed that several factors including agreement with terminal disclosures and a positive attitude toward HPC were independently associated with necessity of ADs.

Conclusions

We found that attitudes toward ADs among cancer patients, family caregivers, oncologists, and the general public were significantly different. Our study also suggests that favorable attitudes toward comfort end-of-life care and HPC are keys that influence the perceived need for ADs.     

Trandolapril/verapamil sustained release: a review of its use in the treatment of essential hypertension

Trandolapril/verapamil sustained release (SR) [Tarka] is an oral, fixed-dose combination of the ACE inhibitor trandolapril and the SR formulation of the phenylalkylamine calcium channel antagonist verapamil. It is indicated for the treatment of hypertension in patients who require more than one agent to achieve blood pressure (BP) targets. In the large, randomised, multicentre INVEST (INternational VErapamil SR/trandolapril STudy), a verapamil SR-based treatment strategy that included trandolapril in most patients was as effective as an atenolol-based treatment strategy in reducing the risk of the primary outcome (first occurrence of death [all-cause], nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI] or nonfatal stroke) in patients with hypertension and coronary artery disease (CAD) and was as well tolerated. Trandolapril/verapamil SR is generally more effective at controlling hypertension than either component as monotherapy, and is as effective as a number of other fixed-dose combination therapies. The combination is as well tolerated as trandolapril monotherapy and is at least as well tolerated as verapamil SR monotherapy. In hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the BENEDICT (BErgamo NEphrologic DIabetes Complications Trial), trandolapril/verapamil SR prolonged the time to the onset of persistent microalbuminuria compared with placebo, as did trandolapril monotherapy. Thus, trandolapril/verapamil SR is an effective option for the treatment of essential hypertension in patients requiring more than one agent to achieve BP targets, including those with compelling indications, such as CAD or type 2 diabetes.